Remember everyone thought Gonzaga would fall after Monson left for Minnesota. Yet Few has been tremendous, plus Butler and VCU went deeper in the tournament than the rest of the Gonzaga`s of the world.

I dig my toes into the sand, the ocean looks like a thousand diamonds strewn across a blue blanket, I lean against the wind, pretend that I am weightless, and in this moment I am happy. (Incubus- Wish you were here)

-why i am trying i am not sure, but i'll give it go....-mb- see these FACTS about the ncaa tourney...

Butler has appeared 11 times (10 in the last 16 seasons under 4 different coaches) and has a record of 18-11. VCU, which has only been a D-1 program since 1973, has 11 NCAA appearances (5 in the last 9 seasons under 3 different coaches) and a record of 11-11

-these are not programs that have had success with one coach or with one or two recruiting classes, this may not qualify as sustained but it is pretty darn good-i thought the goal for every school included getting to the ncaa tourney but you don't go by ncaa appearances, you seem to have a standard different than anyone else's, which is not necessarily bad but i can't find what your standard is-i don't think ucla or duke are looking to move to the a10, yet

Yes. I am certainly not agreeing with MB; however, it does appear that he is stating that b/c someone must represent the bad conferences (14th and 15th RPI conference), being the best of the bad is not much of an accomplishment. Therefore, no credit is really given for making the Tourney from the CAA and Horizon. And since Butler and VCU only made it to the Final Four under Stevens and Smart and since Stevens and Smart will soon be gone if history repeats itself, then it will be back to being an ordinary team soon.

MB, IMO, does have a point about the teams, like Butler in the Horizon and X in the old MCC, which can dominate the conferences and make the Tourneys each year. No doubt both Butler and X made it to the Tourney a year or two in the past when they probably would not have made it as an "at large" team in a conference such as the A10.

In short, if you add Butler and VCU to the A10, the A10 certainly gets stronger but it does not necessarily increase the number of teams it sends to the Tourney - 2 more bids b/c we all know that VCU and Butler are "Tourney" teams. Instead, Butler's leaving the Horizon means that someone else will get the chance to make the Tourney 11 years in a row. IMO, getting more than 3 or 4 teams each year will be very tough for the A10. To make my point even more obvious, for instance, assuming Creighton, GMU and Belmont (each a recent "Tourney team") all were to the join the A10 as well, the A10 would not get 3 more bids on the basis.

BLIKNS, sure, I agree, some mid majors like Gonzaga and Xavier have a deep committment at the top of the house and continue with their success after they lose a golden boy coach. But most wither and die.
And to those of you who keep keep redundantly citing Butler and VCU's tournament appearances, (yes, the GOT IN) they represent much lower tier conferences. Different situation.

BCS = Stakes horses
A-10 = Allowance
Horizon & Colonial = claimers

Yes, I said that Butler and VCU excelled recently, tremendous accomplishments, Butler especially was magical, VCU went deep. But when their coaches leave, they will almost certainly slide. If they stayed in their old conferences, they would probably keep making the tournament here and there with the next guy. But not go deep into the tourney.

BLIKNS, sure, I agree, some mid majors like Gonzaga and Xavier have a deep committment at the top of the house and continue with their success after they lose a golden boy coach. But most wither and die.And to those of you who keep keep redundantly citing Butler and VCU's tournament appearances, (yes, the GOT IN) they represent much lower tier conferences. Different situation.

BCS = Stakes horsesA-10 = Allowance Horizon & Colonial = claimers

Yes, I said that Butler and VCU excelled recently, tremendous accomplishments, Butler especially was magical, VCU went deep. But when their coaches leave, they will almost certainly slide. If they stayed in their old conferences, they would probably keep making the tournament here and there with the next guy. But not go deep into the tourney.

Are you really ignorant enough to believe that Smart and Stevens are the first successful coaches these teams have had?

“Lance, you've weaseled yourself through life using your hearing as an excuse. You're a disgrace to cripples. If I was a cripple in a wheelchair and saw [the way] you play basketball, I'd shoot myself.”
-Rick Majerus

"The promises of this world are, for the most part, vain phantoms; and to confide in one's self, and become something of worth and value is the best and safest course."
-Michelangelo

Are you really ignorant enough to believe that Smart and Stevens are the first successful coaches these teams have had?

Successful, yes, they had some decent squads, but don't tell me making it to the NCAA's in the Colonial and Horizon are the same statistically as making it in the mid majors. Many times, people on this board have cited that Butler enjoys the advantage of being in the Horizon and making the NCAA's easily. NOW, many of the same are taking the opposite position. Because I am right.

what other programs that are not already old school BCS national programs would make you happier? please tell us, if you had your wish with no limitations other than the obvious it wont be a current BCS school, on replacing charlotte and temple in our conference, who would you select? maybe if we know your expectations of what a real replacement would be, we can empathize with your reasoning?

Successful, yes, they had some decent squads, but don't tell me making it to the NCAA's in the Colonial and Horizon are the same statistically as making it in the mid majors. Many times, people on this board have cited that Butler enjoys the advantage of being in the Horizon and making the NCAA's easily. NOW, many of the same are taking the opposite position. Because I am right.

I could argue that its HARDER to make the tourney from a small conference than it is from a big conference. As a small conference school you either have to 1) be nearly perfect in the regular season conference games, including 8+ road games or 2) be perfect in the conference tourney. Neither are easy and it might be easier to ask a team to go .500 in the Big East than it is to consistently be the only team from your conference to make the dance.

That being said, its misleading to say the CAA or Horizon are that bad is ridiculous. Here are the Conference RPI ranks going back a few years. Clearly, the A-10 is better but we aren't talking about the SWAC here.

Interests:The Billikens, Ainad Shriner Drum and Bugle Corps, The Rotary Club of Swansea, Collecting Anheuser Busch Beer Steins, and Watching high school sports.

Posted 17 May 2012 - 01:20 PM

Yes, I read his post. Let's start with this, roy: do you equate the Horizon (# 14) and Colonial (#15) to the A-10? And, SLU had a miserable run, no talent, under Sodie. Nice guy, good game coach, terrible recruiter. Yes, Butler and VCU are good pick ups after losing Temple and Charlotte, but are not an upgrade. Temple by far has a deeper tradition and success. Don't just compare NCAA appearances. And Charlotte ain't that bad. So when the dust settles and the two golden boy coaches leave, down the road, they will be middle of the pack.

mb, while i agree soderberg wasnt and isnt the on court success of rickma, to label it as "miserable" is flat out wrong. his overall record while at slu was over 500 and a better win loss percentage then rich grawer even though cusa and the A-10 were far better conferences to play against than grawer had. you might want to label his time here as mediocre, i wouldnt argue that, but miserable is inaccurate.

as to going back to the subject at hand, as much as you continue to want to link butler and vcu's success to smart and stevens, as bizzle's post detailed, the previous coaches were very very successful. so it amazes me you expect butler an vcu to fall back. the programs have consistently found very good head coaches to continue their success and i would expect that to continue.

secondly, even if you were right and there was an eminent regression coming when the coaches leave, what makes you think that will happen. both coaches have turned down the top available jobs two years in a row to stay at butler and vcu. why will that change now that they are in an even better conference?

as to temple and charlotte, while i agree temple is/was the show piece of the A-10, charlotte is not. and has not been since leaving cusa. there is no way the cumlative of temple and charlotte are the equal of butler and vcu.

you need to do a better job of preparing your case if you want any of us to bite off on your feelings that butler and vcu are not good for the conference compared to the cumlative effect of losing temple and charlotte.

personally, i have long been a "stay in the A-10 to get to the next stage" guy since we joined the A-10. right now i am leaning more to the A-10 is the place to be for eternity. soon it wouldnt surprise me if schools getting shafted by the bcs conferences for no football or sub par football are looking to join us. i say the A-10 appears to be fixing weaknesses and problems and seem to be out front more than any of the non bcs schools.

personally, i have long been a "stay in the A-10 to get to the next stage" guy since we joined the A-10. right now i am leaning more to the A-10 is the place to be for eternity. soon it wouldnt surprise me if schools getting shafted by the bcs conferences for no football or sub par football are looking to join us. i say the A-10 appears to be fixing weaknesses and problems and seem to be out front more than any of the non bcs schools.

Ding Ding Ding.

Commissioner McGlade nailed realignment and now she just needs to fix the TV contract.

Successful, yes, they had some decent squads, but don't tell me making it to the NCAA's in the Colonial and Horizon are the same statistically as making it in the mid majors. Many times, people on this board have cited that Butler enjoys the advantage of being in the Horizon and making the NCAA's easily. NOW, many of the same are taking the opposite position. Because I am right.

Uhhh, the CAA and Horizon are the very definition of what 'mid major' is. In fact, per Wikipedia, the list of conferences generally considered 'mid-major' include the Horizon and Colonial. It also points out that generally, the MWC , A-10 and CUSA do not consider themselves 'mid-majors'. Perhaps you meant 'high-major' or 'BCS'?

Bizzle, which year did we lose 2 games in the Tournament? Check your FACTS, you commie.

REALITY.

I'm with MB73, yawning my ass off. Why is the A10 settling for MID MAJORS when we should be going after Dook and Seeracuse, places where they have long-term proven winners, not just flashes in the pan.

REALITY.

1957. There was a third place game in the Regionals that year and SLU lost that game as well as the Regional semi-final. So that is where the two losses came from.

Even if one wants to discount Butler's and VCU's NCAA tourney appearances (though kshoe makes a very legit and good point about the difficulty in making multiple trips from a smaller conference), wouldn't each school's relative success in the tourney mean something? Take away Shaka and Stevens, and you still have schools that have won more tourney games than SLU has. VCU won 5 NCAA tourney games before Shaka's run. Butler won 7 games before Stevens took over. Once again, SLU has all of 4 NCAA tourney wins in its entire history.

Also, Butler has 4 at-large bids in its history and VCU has 3, so they didn't ALWAYS have to win the conference toruney of a smaller conference to get into the tourney. Yes, most of the time they got in via conference tournament wins. But one could also argue that they have gotten screwed over a couple of times when they've failed to win their conference tourneys and not receiving at-large bids.